Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2010/07/27 18:48:13
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
US 'fails to account' for Iraq reconstruction billions
A US federal watchdog has criticised the US military for failing to account properly for billions of dollars it received to help rebuild Iraq.
The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction says the US Department of Defence is unable to account properly for 96% of the money.
Out of just over $9bn (£5.8bn), $8.7bn is unaccounted for, the inspector says.
The US military said the funds were not necessarily missing, but that spending records might have been archived.
In a response attached to the report, it said attempting to account for the money might require "significant archival retrieval efforts".
Reconstruction money The funds are separate from the $53bn allocated by the US Congress for rebuilding Iraq.
Much of the money came from the sale of Iraqi oil and gas, and some frozen Saddam Hussein-era assets were also sold off.
The money was in a special fund administered by the US Department of Defense, the Development Fund for Iraq (DFI), and was earmarked for reconstruction projects.
But the report says that a lack of proper accounting and poor oversight makes it impossible to say exactly what happened to most of it.
According to the report, the Pentagon is unable to fully account for $8.7bn of funds it withdrew between 2004 and 2007, and of that amount it "could not provide documentation to substantiate how it spent $2.6bn".
Past mismanagement The audit blamed the inability to account for the money on a number of factors.
Notably, it said that most defence department organisations which received DFI funds failed to set up US Treasury Department accounts for the money as required.
It also said that there was no central organisation within the defence department which was charged with overseeing how the funds were accounted for or spent.
"The breakdown in controls left the funds vulnerable to inappropriate uses and undetected loss," the report said.
This is not the first time that allegations of missing billions have surfaced in relation to the US-led invasion of Iraq and its aftermath.
In 2005, the inspector general criticised the Coalition Provisional Authority, the US-led occupation administration, for its management of an $8.8bn fund that belonged to the Iraqi government.
A criminal investigation conducted led to the conviction of eight US officials on bribery, fraud and money-laundering charges.
The latest audit does not include allegations of criminal conduct.
Man, that military sure is efficient!
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
2010/07/27 18:51:24
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
I am pretty sure this is a temporary obstacle to finding out the true depths of where the money went. There has to be a paper trail that leads somewhere, as the article states that money went missing in 2005 was found to of been funneled for personal gain.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/27 19:04:46
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2010/07/27 18:55:09
Subject: Re:DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
This is clearly the work of the liberal media. Why on this very day, on this very board I was reading about how efficient the military is !
spending records might have been archived.
Ha! And, when we need wikileaks to be wading through endless pages of documents... are they on the case...?!
It's political correctness gone mad.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/27 18:56:17
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
2010/07/27 19:01:30
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
WarOne wrote:I am pretty sure this is a temporary obstacle to finding out the truth depths of where the money went. There has to be a goat skin receipt trail that leads somewhere, as the article states that money went missing in 2005 was found to of been funneled for personal gain.
FTFY.
OT: Implying that the military branches are responsible for the civilian agencies above them hardly supports your mocking statement.
As if on cue, you hear two people singing from the stairwell, and the door is opened and a pair of very smelly, very dirty guardsmen stumble in, completely drunk, and covered in vomit, and immediately collapse unconsious on the porch. You drag them to their beds, realising that they will not be waking up for some time.
2010/07/27 19:27:56
Subject: Re:DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
OT: Implying that the military donkeys are responsible for the civilian brain surgeons above them totally supports your reasonable statement.
FTFY.
And the military has to be held accountable somewhere for losing BILLIONS of DOLLARS that didn't go towards war funding, but towards fixing a nation. War funding we know is a giant chasm in which the money is throw and never seen again.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/27 19:37:31
OT: Implying that the military donkeys are responsible for the civilian brain surgeons above them totally supports your reasonable statement.
FTFY.
And the military has to be held accountable somewhere for losing BILLIONS of DOLLARS that didn't go towards war funding, but towards fixing a nation. War funding we know is a giant chasm in which the money is throw and never seen again.
Reconstruction efforts are operated under the Department of Defense. They are civilian military contractors and oversight ultimately falls to the military above them for correctly tracking it's expenditures.
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
2010/07/27 19:45:06
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
WarOne wrote:And the military has to be held accountable somewhere for losing BILLIONS of DOLLARS that didn't go towards war funding, but towards fixing a nation. War funding we know is a giant chasm in which the money is throw and never seen again.
DoD is a civilian agency that the military branches fall under. The respective services are not responsible for the rebuilding of Iraq/Afghan or the allocation of the funds that was the responsiblity of DoD appointed contractors and sub divisions.
The OT remark was directed at OPbtw not you and your attempt at humor.
As if on cue, you hear two people singing from the stairwell, and the door is opened and a pair of very smelly, very dirty guardsmen stumble in, completely drunk, and covered in vomit, and immediately collapse unconsious on the porch. You drag them to their beds, realising that they will not be waking up for some time.
2010/07/27 19:45:58
Subject: Re:DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
All that money was spent, mainly on clearing roads and high ways of debris/bodies and most of all IED's. Reconstrustion moves slowly there mainly due to the fact the local government must approve any and all rebuilding projects. Government buildings come first and that takes priority as there is nothing but a puppet government there run by the United States. Curruption at its finest $300 toilet seats and $3,000 hammers take up alot of money.
Chaos rules you all drool! Blood for the Blood God! 10,000 pts Black Legion
2,000 pts Traitor Catchian Guard (1067th).
8,000 point Sam Hain Eldar.
2,000 pts Squat Biker Force.
1,500 Orc Hoard (painting for a friend).
2010/07/27 19:48:40
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
WarOne wrote:And the military has to be held accountable somewhere for losing BILLIONS of DOLLARS that didn't go towards war funding, but towards fixing a nation. War funding we know is a giant chasm in which the money is throw and never seen again.
DoD is a civilian agency that the military branches fall under. The respective services are not responsible for the rebuilding of Iraq/Afghan or the allocation of the funds that was the responsiblity of DoD appointed contractors and sub divisions.
The OT remark was directed at OPbtw not you and your attempt at humor.
It really depends on who actually had oversight on these contracts. The military tends to have at least advisorial oversight in Iraqi civilian contracts because they operate in close proximity and under the command of the military. The DoD is a "civilian" department that is staffed by a significant number of military personell (all of them). Civilian contractors have been a black pit of money since the war started though given the lack of a department specifically designed for advising and tracking contractor expenditure and use and the ill suited nature of the military for such tasks.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/27 19:49:36
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
2010/07/27 19:57:22
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
WarOne wrote:And the military has to be held accountable somewhere for losing BILLIONS of DOLLARS that didn't go towards war funding, but towards fixing a nation. War funding we know is a giant chasm in which the money is throw and never seen again.
DoD is a civilian agency that the military branches fall under. The respective services are not responsible for the rebuilding of Iraq/Afghan or the allocation of the funds that was the responsiblity of DoD appointed contractors and sub divisions.
The OT remark was directed at OPbtw not you and your attempt at humor.
It really depends on who actually had oversight on these contracts. The military tends to have at least advisorial oversight in Iraqi civilian contracts because they operate in close proximity and under the command of the military. The DoD is a "civilian" department that is advised by a significant number of military personel. Civilian contractors have been a black pit of money since the war started though given the lack of a department specifically designed for advising and tracking contractor expenditure and use and the ill suited nature of the military for such tasks.
Slight modification in italics, and you are right on the money.
As if on cue, you hear two people singing from the stairwell, and the door is opened and a pair of very smelly, very dirty guardsmen stumble in, completely drunk, and covered in vomit, and immediately collapse unconsious on the porch. You drag them to their beds, realising that they will not be waking up for some time.
2010/07/27 20:12:05
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
This is where the money went! Tiny killer robots. Unfortunately a flaw was found, a little too late...
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2010/07/27 20:34:36
Subject: Re:DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
Halliburton and it's former subsidiary KBR were awarded multi-billion contracts to put out oil fires and reconstruction in Iraq at the onset of the war. Part of the deal in the contracts is that the government would reimburse both companies for costs plus an additional 1% which can lead to situations where there's an incentive to overcharge. The cost + 1% is common in most defense contracts. Also Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton up until his election as VP.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2010/07/27 20:35:15
2010/07/27 23:26:35
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
Are we talking operational efficiency or fiscal efficiency?
The military tends to have at least advisorial oversight in Iraqi civilian contracts because they operate in close proximity and under the command of the military.
Yes. Captain Jimmy, while driving by some contractors, stops to ask to see their books and make sure they're spending the money right.
The DoD is a "civilian" department that is staffed by a significant number of military personell (all of them).
Not true. The DoD is about 30% civilian 70% military. Most of the military personnel are in the armed branches. Other branches having varying degrees of civilian employees depending on which ones we're talking about. The DIA for example is about 1/3 military and the rest civilian. The NSA is almost all civilian.
Civilian contractors have been a black pit of money since the war started though given the lack of a department specifically designed for advising and tracking contractor expenditure and use and the ill suited nature of the military for such tasks.
There is oversight. It's called Joint Contracting Command (No idea if it's any good at it's task). They're almost exclusively civilian run and manned agency.
In the case of Iraq reconstruction there is also a lot going on with the US Army Corp of Engineers, which is civilian operated military led, but there are a lot of problems inside the USACE's civilian and military elements.
Previously there had been the Coalition Provisional Authority, where several officials were charged with bribery and corruption. The CPA was run by civilians up until it was dissolved when we handed it's tasks over to the Iraqi government.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/27 23:28:15
Are we talking operational efficiency or fiscal efficiency?
.
There neither there operationally effective not efficient
H.B.M.C. wrote:
"Balance, playtesting - a casual gamer craves not these things!" - Yoda, a casual gamer.
Three things matter in marksmanship -
location, location, location
MagickalMemories wrote:How about making another fist?
One can be, "Da Fist uv Mork" and the second can be, "Da Uvver Fist uv Mork."
Make a third, and it can be, "Da Uvver Uvver Fist uv Mork"
Eric
2010/07/28 02:50:03
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
it does, the vast majority of the us militerys might will never be used, its the same way with every military in history, they sacrifice efficiency for effectiveness.
So again they are effective, no military has or will ever be efficient
H.B.M.C. wrote:
"Balance, playtesting - a casual gamer craves not these things!" - Yoda, a casual gamer.
Three things matter in marksmanship -
location, location, location
MagickalMemories wrote:How about making another fist?
One can be, "Da Fist uv Mork" and the second can be, "Da Uvver Fist uv Mork."
Make a third, and it can be, "Da Uvver Uvver Fist uv Mork"
Eric
2010/07/28 04:31:27
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
That's not good, not unheard of, but still not good.
I demand that as punishment for leaking previous information, that intelligence guy should be put in charge of finding out where every last penny went.
I doubt that we'll find out where more than half of it went though.
2010/07/28 09:35:51
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
youbedead wrote: it does, the vast majority of the us militerys might will never be used, its the same way with every military in history, they sacrifice efficiency for effectiveness.
So again they are effective, no military has or will ever be efficient
Yes, and if anyone was ever silly enough to claim to set about making them efficient, they'd end up with an army that was incredibly fragile (because redundancy is inefficient) and spent a load of it's time saying "that thing you want us to do is not something we can do (because versatility is inefficient).
But none of that has anything to do with why people like to think the military is efficient. They like to think that government is bad and wasteful but rah-rah army is awesome. They believe this because social services and road construction is boring, but tanks are awesome*.
It's like explaining to someone that katanas aren't actually super awesome swords that can totally cut a tank in half - you're arguing with the fanboy part of the brain and wasting your time.
*To some extent they're right - tanks are awesome.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/28 09:42:52
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2010/07/28 10:26:13
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
avantgarde wrote:Part of the deal in the contracts is that the government would reimburse both companies for costs plus an additional 1% which can lead to situations where there's an incentive to overcharge.
Like the stories of them torching trucks with a puncture instead of replacing the tyre, still it's nice to have a member of board in the cabinet. It was a bumper bonus year for him (he had performance related pay).
Carthago delenda est
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/28 10:38:13
My combined Macragge PDF Imperial Guard and Ultramarine 3rd Co. Blog Clicky
Why is this a shock? It's an open secret that US contractors see / saw the Iraq war as an open cheque book... with them soon moving onto Afghanistan now that the country has so many uptapped resources.
Live your life that the fear of death can never enter your heart. Trouble no one about his religion. Respect others in their views and demand that they respect yours. Love your life, perfect your life. Beautify all things in your life. Seek to make your life long and of service to your people. When your time comes to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled with fear of death, so that when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time to live their lives over again in a different way. Sing your death song, and die like a hero going home.
Lt. Rorke - Act of Valor
I can now be found on Facebook under the name of Wulfstan Design
www.wulfstandesign.co.uk
http://www.voodoovegas.com/
2010/07/28 22:10:21
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
youbedead wrote: it does, the vast majority of the us militerys might will never be used, its the same way with every military in history, they sacrifice efficiency for effectiveness.
So again they are effective, no military has or will ever be efficient
Yes, and if anyone was ever silly enough to claim to set about making them efficient, they'd end up with an army that was incredibly fragile (because redundancy is inefficient) and spent a load of it's time saying "that thing you want us to do is not something we can do (because versatility is inefficient).
But none of that has anything to do with why people like to think the military is efficient. They like to think that government is bad and wasteful but rah-rah army is awesome. They believe this because social services and road construction is boring, but tanks are awesome*.
It's like explaining to someone that katanas aren't actually super awesome swords that can totally cut a tank in half - you're arguing with the fanboy part of the brain and wasting your time.
*To some extent they're right - tanks are awesome.
Exactly chose one
Efficient or effective
I prefer effective
H.B.M.C. wrote:
"Balance, playtesting - a casual gamer craves not these things!" - Yoda, a casual gamer.
Three things matter in marksmanship -
location, location, location
MagickalMemories wrote:How about making another fist?
One can be, "Da Fist uv Mork" and the second can be, "Da Uvver Fist uv Mork."
Make a third, and it can be, "Da Uvver Uvver Fist uv Mork"
Eric
2010/07/28 22:16:47
Subject: DoD is unable to account for 96% of 9 billion dollars in Iraq reconstruction funds.
youbedead wrote: it does, the vast majority of the us militerys might will never be used, its the same way with every military in history, they sacrifice efficiency for effectiveness.
So again they are effective, no military has or will ever be efficient
Yes, and if anyone was ever silly enough to claim to set about making them efficient, they'd end up with an army that was incredibly fragile (because redundancy is inefficient) and spent a load of it's time saying "that thing you want us to do is not something we can do (because versatility is inefficient).
But none of that has anything to do with why people like to think the military is efficient. They like to think that government is bad and wasteful but rah-rah army is awesome. They believe this because social services and road construction is boring, but tanks are awesome*.
It's like explaining to someone that katanas aren't actually super awesome swords that can totally cut a tank in half - you're arguing with the fanboy part of the brain and wasting your time.
*To some extent they're right - tanks are awesome.
Exactly chose one
Efficient or effective
I prefer effective
At this point with two failed wars on our hands I'm not sure why. We sure did spend a lot of money.
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
Chaos rules you all drool! Blood for the Blood God! 
